About your Search

20130115
20130123
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
all be better if he would drink whiskey with lawmakers as lyndon johnson did. >> yeah, far guy who is so smart it really does puzzle me. perhaps jod city or john can answer as to why he just doesn't appreciate the fact that personal relationships matter in politics at every level always have going back to lincoln. look at spielberg's film. 2013 always will. he doesn't do it terribly well, maybe that's why he wants to suggest it doesn't matter. i agree with everything that jodi just said about some of the opportunities. i do think it's worrisome and not just a parochial matter. it's worrisome that they aren't bringing more people in not just because diversity of voices and views helps but some of these people are tired. some of these people-- particularly economic people-- they are spent, charlie. i wish there were -- you had this sense there was an infusion of fresh ideas and fresh blood. not to change views and change him but just to kind of bring more vital toy the tail rather than just get ready for the big fight. senator chuck schumer has a theory to go to al's point that he te
, lyndon johnson. i talked with the brookings scholar who was a young aide in the eisenhower white house. he said eisenhower was deeply not do anything. an and lbj but he knew to make things work you had to have this getting along. the key difference here is johnson, rayburn, o'neal, they could deliver. this president does not have someone who can deliver and in the senate, republicans have abused the fill bupser. -- filibuster. >> describe eisenhower? >> he was devious. >> he was the most devious person nixon had ever known. you said, i mean that in a positive sense. >> they could work together. >> reagan was not actually dealing with a house my majority, -- minority, that there was a conservative majority in the house. when you add the republicans and conservative democrats. what we had was ideological sorting since then of the the parties were nor geographical. nowadays if you're conservative, you're republican. if you're a liberal, you're a democrat. obama is up against an actual majority of conservative house members. reagan didn't have to face a majority of liberals. >> how do you
was rare. very, very rare. so in lyndon johnson's tenure as majority leader which ended when he was vice president in january of '61, there was one filibuster in his six years. and harry reid's six years, almost 400. that's the contrast. it's gradual. the right to filibuster has been there since the modern senate was there. but it's the perversion of senators that are willing to filibuster anything, any single thing they bring this to bear. >> describe that perversion. >> that perversion is everything from the almost 100 judicial vacancies that you talked about to many examples of recess appointments in the executive branch. we just spent $3 billion on a presidential election and the president's appointees, most of them he makes now are most likely never to get confirmed, unlikely to get debated, certainly unlikely to get discussed and certainly unlikely to serve. >> you want to end the filibuster. what's behind that? >> senator jeff morgan would make it essential that people talk. this is what the american people want. it would encourage debate, it wouldn't push it away. >> what is your
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)